Can't decide between B&W and Roksan k2 bookshelfs

 

New member
Username: Skywalker_123

Post Number: 1
Registered: Nov-11
Hi everyone,

I have a little "problem".A couple off days ago my speakers died (20+ years old) and now I've got the chance to finally start upgrading my audio components.

I wanted to start with the amp but since the speakers are gone I have to buy some quality bookshelfs, because my room is on the small side, around 4 x 4.5 meters give or take.

I want to buy decent speakers now, and around the next summer the amp and cd player.I cant buy them at once because my budget for speakers is 900-1000euros at most, and that will be the budget for an amp later, so thats why I did my audiotions with amps in the 800-1000euros range, to know what will be my goal.

Now about the speakers.

First I live in a small country and here, there are only 2-3 hifi shops where I can listen and buy decent equipment.Online purchase is not an option because there is no way to know If I'll like the sound.

Now,

I've listened these speakers: Monitor Audio RX2, Roksan Kandy K2 TR-5, Mordaunt-Short Mezzo2, B&W CM1, B&W CM5, B&W 685 and B&W 705.

From that list I didn't like the sound from the MA RX2, Mezzo2 and B&W 685.If I didn't have the money for the more expensive speakers I would've bought the RX2 in a blink of an eye.

Now the Roksans: First the build quality, I find these speakers gorgeous in Rosewood and their size is right what I want.And the sound, that tweeter had an amazing detailed sound, it wasn't harsh and edgy, but at the same time there were a lott of details in the music.The bass was decent in the room, but that room was way bigger then mine so I think that will only be better and fuller.The midrange was very seductive, I think that it was a tiny bit colored but boy, I've never heard Patricia Barber and Diana Krall sound that good and seductive (again).Instrumental music sounded phenomenal with wide soundstage, great 3d feeling, depth and separation off the instruments especially in the tweeter region.All in all, great package.

Now to alert you, these 3 auditions with B&W were in another shop, so I had a little problem compering the sound.

B&W CM1 : When I first saw them I was stunned, they were smaller then I expected but looked let say OK (I hate shiny objects ) Now the sound, the highs were good, not that much details like the Roksans, but also refined.However the problems were in the midrange/bass department.Simply this tiny speakers didn't have enough dynamics and was clearly struggling with more complex music, for vocals it was good, but not enough, I think that it's midrange didn't sound like it should (or how I would like it to) and I liked the details with the Roksans better.

B&W CM5 : The same impressions like the CM1.It did have better dynamics but again that midrange and tweeter, something was missing.

The last were the B&W 705 : First build quality and looks.The rosewood version is perfect, the curved cabinets and non-parallel sides are a joy to look at.The sound, well it's different from the CM series, it was more let say cold or analytical, the tweeter was i little bit harsh and edgy, I knew that I liked that maybe sterile presentation but something was wrong.That was the moment when I told them to change the Rotel amp, and give Marantz and Denon a try.Suddenly the harshness was gone and the tweeter was more calm, it was still that precise and analytical sound but now it was way better.Dynamics were great, the soundstage was excellent and there was some good feeling with instrumental music, like airnes or separation between the instruments that I really liked.Maybe this was because of that semi-separate tweeter?

After all this listening I'm confused, should I go with the new Roksan K2 which were a little colored but I enjoyed their sound, or go with the older B&W 705 which had an analytical and precise sound that I also verry much liked and enjoyed?

Oh and the 705s win for me in the looks department

These speakers will be used a loong time and I dont plan on changing them in the near future.

I would really like and apriciate your opinions.
 

Platinum Member
Username: Artk

Albany, Oregon USA

Post Number: 14815
Registered: Feb-05
From reading your post it seems that you liked the sound of the Roksan the best. Never heard a Roksan speaker but from your description seems like a good one.
 

New member
Username: Skywalker_123

Post Number: 2
Registered: Nov-11
Thanks for your answer Art,

I must say this is the first time that I audiotion good speakers and everything sounds better than what I had.

I liked a lott of individual things with the 705s but as a complete speaker I think I prefer the Roksan but I'm not sure.

The roksans reminded me of my dream speaker, the P3ESR, there are a lott others that do some things better, but when I listened them (Harbeth) they were just right.Thats the feeling I have with the roksans.
 

Platinum Member
Username: Artk

Albany, Oregon USA

Post Number: 14816
Registered: Feb-05
I own and am currently listening to my P3ESR's.
 

New member
Username: Skywalker_123

Post Number: 3
Registered: Nov-11
Great choice Artk (sorry for misspelling your name in the last post) , that is one fine speaker, but I dont need to tell you that. I wish that I had my original budget now, I almost bought the P3ESR last year and I still regret not buying them.
 

New member
Username: Skywalker_123

Post Number: 4
Registered: Nov-11
Great choice Artk (sorry for misspelling your name in the last post) , that is one fine speaker, but I dont need to tell you that. I wish that I had my original budget now, I almost bought the P3ESR last year and I still regret not buying them.
 

Platinum Member
Username: Artk

Albany, Oregon USA

Post Number: 14820
Registered: Feb-05
They are a great speaker, especially for a small room. You simply have to not need deep bass. I have a REL T5 sub that I use with them sometimes...not today.
 

Gold Member
Username: Illuminator

USA

Post Number: 5610
Registered: Apr-05
I'll just throw in my take on the B&W speakers you listed.

For B&W bookshelf speakers, I've owned the 685, 686, currently have the CM1s, and have heard the 705's.

I agree that the 685's really aren't all that great. For what's it's worth, I think the 686's are much more impressive with cost considered. But you have a bigger budget so it's probably not worth bothering with the 686's.

It's a shame you didn't like the CM1's. I have them in Maple and they are one of my most favorite-looking speakers to date. And you made a funny comment that I agree with--I also feel that most of B&W's speakers are much smaller than one would expect--in particular the 686's and CM1's. If the shine is too much, you can put on the grilles, but that would represent a compromise in sound quality I feel. And a lack of speaker plug holes (they have magnetic grilles) seems to emphasize the speakers are meant to be run with grilles removed. No unsightly holes on the front of the cabinet. Plus the small size is very appealing to me. The price increase for the CM5's doesn't seem justified as all you get is a slightly bigger woofer with slightly more dynamics, and the bigger look isn't as attractive to me.

As you said the 705's are quite analytical, and even harsh. I had a hard time getting them to sound good with my current amplifier (Marantz) so I decided not to purchase them. Their design is very much a classic B&W one, but I tend to prefer the design of the CM's slightly, particularly the rear of the cabinet and the speaker terminals (I'm being picky--most people don't even see the back of the speaker--but at this price point I think it's worth thinking about). And overall I just feel the 705's look a bit old now.

I agree that the CM1's do trade in a bit of detail for refinement, but I've learned to love it; and they're still very detailed. Further, for being such small speakers, of course the bass/midbass from them isn't stellar by any means. That's why I purchased a PV1 subwoofer to compliment them and it's been an incredible compact system both in aesthetics and sound. If you're only running bookshelf speakers with no plans for a sub, I would definitely not recommend the CM1's. Admittedly they can still be turned up very loud for their size, despite being a bit bass shy.

Vocals with my Marantz are absolutely stunning...I'm surprised you didn't care for the vocals from the CM1's. In fact, there have been times when the speakers have startled me thinking that someone was in the room.

One final note about the CM series: recently B&W has begun manufacturing all CM series speakers in China...it's worth hunting around for a used pair that was made in England should you ever want to get a pair. Maple was only available for the English models, and gloss black is only available on the Chinese models. From what I recall, the other colors such as wenge were seen on both English and Chinese models (just as a quick means of differentiation).

I haven't heard the Roxans, and as Art mentioned, if that's what you like the most, then go for them.
 

New member
Username: Skywalker_123

Post Number: 5
Registered: Nov-11
Jexx, thank you for that detailed answer.

When I wanted to change my speakers a couple of months ago and my budget was around 400-500 euros, the 686s and 685s were the first speakers that I auditioned and I really liked.But now the budget have doubled and the speakers in this price range sound more clear, realistic, tighter bass and are better.Offcourse the price is higher.

About the CM1,

I really liked to like this speaker , maybe I expressed myself wrong when I said what I didn't like about them.I think vocals sounded excellent, there is no denying that.The biggest problem that I had with them is their size, yes they are beautifull and cute (even with those shiny parts) but they were lost in the room when asked to play complex instrumental music, they didn't have that deep bass note and they were struggling.I just didn't get that feeling that I'm listening like it should.Since I dont want to use subwoofer I just can't get them.

Now the CM5 are just not my cup of tea, yes they have better dynamics, but for 100 euros less I have the Roksans with that excellent Ribon tweeter and sound clarity that in my opinion the CM5s can dream for.

I know that beauty is subjective but in my eyes the 705s are the most beautifull speaker from all candidates.I like speakers like this.

Today I went to listen only the Roksans and 705s and brought my CD collection that I'm familliar with and spend 2 hours listening each speaker.

Roksan k2:

Pros: Excellent treble, very clear without any sign of harshness and great open soundstage.Great midrange, especially with jazz recordings like Patricia Barber, the sound was almost like a fullrange speaker.

Cons: Low end, this is the problem now with them.I know they are bookshelfs in a bigger room but I have my worries.Orchestral recordings sounded, I dont know how to describe it, maybe empty or dull.Yes the mids and hights were beautifull but the feeling that something is missing was there, and yes the bass was missing a lott.

B&W 705

Pros: These bookshelfs sounded almost as a fullrange speaker in a room that was big as the one with the roksans.The midrange was smooth and relaxed (I was confused here, 705 and relaxed together??), great depth, clarity and separation of the instruments.The bass was miles better then the Roksans'.Here I could listen those deep notes that were missing with the Roksans and realised how much I missed them.

Cons: Power, Power and Power again.They like it and they need it to sound like they should and open up.Another thing is that the Roksans are tiny bit clearer in the highs and had maybe a bigger soundstage but for this I'm not 100% sure.

Conclusion: I think I'm leaning to the 705s just because that feeling of a bigger speaker and more realistic performance because of the better bass reproduction.Yes the Roksans are a bit clearer but with them I didn't have the feeling that the music is like it should be.
 

Platinum Member
Username: Jan_b_vigne

Dallas, TX

Post Number: 16903
Registered: May-04
.

B&W 705

Pros: These bookshelfs sounded almost as a fullrange speaker in a room that was big as the one with the roksans.The midrange was smooth and relaxed (I was confused here, 705 and relaxed together??), great depth, clarity and separation of the instruments.The bass was miles better then the Roksans'.Here I could listen those deep notes that were missing with the Roksans and realised how much I missed them.





Unlesss you've made the comparison with the same equipment and certainly within the same room, your conclusions are very likely flawed. Bass is the most room dependent quality of a speaker. The "power response" of the speaker is determined by the speaker's position within the confines of the room and its relationship to the reflective surfaces of the room. Speakers mounted closer to walls, ceilings or the floor will benefit from the room surfaces' additive functions which boost certain frequencies above others. Stand mounted speakers can easily improve or degrade with a change in the support structure upon which they reside. Speaker demonstrations performed in a room full of speakers are essentially poor reflections of any one speaker's capacities as the pressure wave changes produced by any speaker will ultimately cause all speakers in that room to contribute their own character to the final sound product. Speakers driven through a single speaker switch box are largely divorced from the drive capabilities of the amplifier due to the autoformer devices in the switch box. In such a demonstration the more difficult to drive speaker load would be hidden from the buyer until they get the speaker home and attempt to drive the speakers with a poorly matched amplifier. Certainly speaker cables should and will influence the final sound. And, of course, any change in listening level will give an edge to the speaker that is playing louder overall. An experienced sales staff should know these rules and they can, should they so desire, use them to influence a buying decision.

Equipment changes can easily account for any perceptual changes in musical performance or, more directly, speaker preference. Remember that Fletcher- Munson dictates human perception of both low and high frequencies will be dependent upon level changes. In other words, should the note be louder (or softer) in either the high or low frequencies, your ear will perceive a deeper or higher note than actually exists. Should a speaker be incapable of reproducing a low frequency signal, it will defualt to a "doubling" effect where the second harmonic of the note is emphasized. Most acoustic instruments, and even many electronic devices, will have a stronger, more emphatic second harmonic when compared against the fundamental frequency. Pay attention to the actual pitch of the lowest bass notes rather than the degree of emphasis placed on them. Being able to separate out the various components of the bass line is sooner or later vital to convincing audio reproduction over the long term. A bass note produced by an instrument which has variable pitch, such as an acoustic or electronic bass instrument, horn or piano, etc. vs a drum which (typically) has only one bass frequency which changes only in level, should enable you to hear both instruments as discrete sound sources and allow you to follow the momentum of the bass line as it leads the music forward. Often a musician will listen to themself and the bass line for their timing and pacing. You should be able to do the same when listening through a sound system. Listen for the communication which occurs between musicians rather than just the individual performers. Music should have a forward drive; if that movement forward doesn't exist in the reproduced sound, something in the system is amiss.


"One note bass" is very common in speakers but also too often ignored in speaker auditions. Equipment changes cannot alter the bass extension of a speaker but equipment can easily change the perception of bass by way of the electrical pairing of amplifier to speaker load. Amplifiers do sound different and what the speakers should be reproducing is the end result of each component in the system before them plus the room in which they exist. As much as 90% of what you actually hear will be the room itself as the speakers load the room with pressure waves and excite various peaks and dips which are dictated by the dimensions of the room and its surfaces' reflective or absorptive qualities.

Speaker designers understand these rules and they can easily play to a slight emphasis of certain frequencies which will make their speakers "jump" more than another design with greater fidelity to the source. "Presence", or that sense of "clear mids", is often no more than a designer making a speaker sound a bit more like a three way system than a two way. This is a very sellable "American" sound which many international companies have adhered to for the sake of profits over fidelity. B&W became the largest international speaker seller only after they had adjusted their "house sound" to more Amercian tastes back in the late 1980's. It wasn't long before other manufacturers, seeing B&W's sales numbers soar, followed suit.

Speakers which require you to play loud will very seldom sound good at lower volumes and most people can't or don't always listen at "live" volume levels. Typically, a speaker which only sounds good at higher volumes will be a somewhat to very difficult load for an amplifier. All things being equal - which can never occur with two different speakers - I would select the speaker which has the higher electrical sensitivity and which represents to easier to drive load for any amplifier. Impedance and electrical phase angle matter in speaker designs and a buyer should be aware of their influence on overall system performance. I would suggest you inquire about these two values before making a buying decision. If you don't understand what these values are and how they affect system performance, ask and we'll lead you to a few explanations. Easy to drive speakers can move between system upgrades with ease while difficult to drive speakers automatically tie you to hefty - read: "expensive" - amplifiers.

Overall, I would suggest you opt for the speaker which reminds you least often that you are listening to a recording and which draws you into the performance. You should walk away from any listening session wanting more music. To make a fair comparison, however, you'll need to hear music through both sets of speakers with the same equipment and in the same room environment.

The idea of using music you are familiar with is far less essential to a speaker audition than is the ability to simply divorce yourself from the concept of hearing a recorded performance. When listening to "familiar" music, all too often you are taken by hearing a sound or a quality you've never noticed before. While transparency to the source is ultimately the final goal of a successful system, it is too easy to become taken in by speakers which constantly impress you. In the end, IMO, it is far more likely you will live longer and more happily with the speakers which impress you the least yet play music as though there were no electronics involved.


If you're making your comparisons at reputable, independent dealers, they should have a reference system set up; a single system they consider the best they can put together. Ask to listen to that system for awhile and then consider just how much you trade off when you adhere to your budget's price limitations. If they have no such system, take that into consideration also.




.
 

Gold Member
Username: Illuminator

USA

Post Number: 5611
Registered: Apr-05
Haha, no worries that you don't care for the CM1's. The way each person enjoys a speaker depends on a lot of personal taste, certainly.

True, the 705 is a beautiful speaker. Perhaps it's just that it has been out for a while that's biasing me! And you're right, typically B&W speakers sound best with lots of power. But I think you'd have some luck pairing them up with an appropriate amplifier. Also, are you getting some sort of discount on the 705's? Because they've been discontinued for a bit now...

You could get the Roxans despite them having poorer bass output and pair them up with a small subwoofer such as the B&W ASW300. I just really do not think bookshelf speakers sound their best without a small subwoofer. I tried to make it work as you did, but it always seemed something was missing: the bass. Out of curiosity, what speakers did you have prior?
 

New member
Username: Skywalker_123

Post Number: 6
Registered: Nov-11
Jan thank you for that excellent post, I learned and realised some new things regarding audio and I'm very gratefull to you.

The thing that you said about the bass and fullness of the speakers and the room made me think that I was wrong and decided to go back to the shop with the Roksans (there works a friend of mine).Because the 2 shops were 50 meters apart (same mall) I told my friend that I cant decide which one to buy and we took the speakers at the B&W dealer ( which is also someone that I know) and had a sit-down in the same room, the same equipment, cables.And again everything was the same, when I listened the Roksans I was thinking that I miss the fuller sound of the B&Ws and when they played the B&Ws I was enjoying and didn't care about anything.

After all the listening sessions with different amps and cd players, in the same room, I liked the B&W better and bought them and have no regrets.

Jexx, yes they want little more power but I live alone and I have no problems with listening at moderate-high levels 1-2 hours a day when I want to relax after work.

About the discount, listed price was 1250 euros, but I got them for 850e brand new so I think that is a good price.

The prior speakers were Technics SB-5, low end but they were OK when I couldnt change them.

Thanks everyone for the help, I learned a lott more then what I thought.
 

Gold Member
Username: Stu_pitt

Stamford, Connecticut USA

Post Number: 4494
Registered: May-05
You did what I was going to advise (and what Jan advised and others hinted at)... You bought the speakers that made you forget you were listening to speakers. Its also a great thing that you could compare both directly in the same environment.

Too many people get hung up on the details (no pun intended) - highs, mids, lows, imaging, etc. There are a lot of speakers out there that do all the hifi stuff great, yet can't carry a tune to save their life.
 

Gold Member
Username: Illuminator

USA

Post Number: 5612
Registered: Apr-05
Great to hear you found a speaker that worked best for you!

Ironically, that's also how I got into this whole high end audio world--I had an old pair of Kenwood speakers from the 70's that my mother purchased brand new back in the day. They were semi-decent considering their age but one of the woofers needed a complete recone and I decided to just upgrade. Have definitely never looked back.

Agreed with Stu that there are so many high end speakers that sound spectacular with high quality recordings, but kinda trashy with everything else. I feel that B&W speakers are pretty good all-around speakers and play just about anything you throw at them fantastically well.
 

Platinum Member
Username: Artk

Albany, Oregon USA

Post Number: 14822
Registered: Feb-05
Congrats non the new speakers, enjoy!
 

Platinum Member
Username: Jan_b_vigne

Dallas, TX

Post Number: 16906
Registered: May-04
.

I'm curious to know what each salesperson thought of the comparisons. Did they prefer their own product? Did they agree the comparisons were fairly done?
 

New member
Username: Skywalker_123

Post Number: 7
Registered: Nov-11
First sorry for the late replay guys, I was out of town for a couple off days, and now that I'm back I just can't stop listening music after work.

Thanks everyone again for the help and the kind words.

Jan,

I was listening the speakers with different amps (in the 1000-1500euros range), different stands and cables and even thou the result was always the same, B&W better all-around with bigger feeling, and Roksan better clarity and soundstage, but somehow thin sounding, we came to the next conclusion.The Roksans were better for a smaller room where the bass will be more present, and for my room it will be better if I go with the 705s because in the near future that room will be little bigger.

But before this conclusion I needed to remind them that I know what I like (sound) and I know them personaly (the salespersons) and told them to shut up and let me listen to some music.After that the day went great, well maybe not that great for the Roksans dealer but he's a friend so it was ok.
 

Gold Member
Username: Kbear

Canada

Post Number: 1127
Registered: Dec-06
I've always wanted to hear the 705, but haven't yet had the chance. Congrats on your purchase and it's nice to hear you have no regrets. I think the 705 has a nice timeless elegance to it's styling, and is unmistakeably B&W.

Jan's point about impedance and phase angles is important. Stereophile reviewed the 705, and while I'm no expert in reading these graphs, their measured 89dB sensitivity along with the impedance graph both seem to suggest that the 705 isn't a very difficult speaker to drive. This is contrary to the reputation B&W speakers have. If this is the case (others may wish to confirm or refute) it would mean you have more amplification options available to you than you otherwise would when it comes time to buy your amp.

http://www.stereophile.com/content/bw-705-loudspeaker-measurements

Wish I saw this thread earlier...I wanted to bring up a point Jan raised, about the need to listen to speakers in the same room and with the same equipment in order to make a fair comparison. This makes complete sense of course, but I tend to think that listening to two speakers with different amplification is preferable assuming that each speaker gets the amp it needs to put it's best foot forward (also assuming that those amplification needs are in fact different). You want to give each speaker the opportunity to shine, and what you like most would then dictate more than just what speaker you get, it would also dictate what kind of amp you buy too.
 

Gold Member
Username: Hawkbilly

Nova Scotia Canada

Post Number: 1433
Registered: Jul-07
"This is contrary to the reputation B&W speakers have."

The reputation is well earned. That said, the 705's are indeed one of their easier loads.
« Previous Thread Next Thread »



Main Forums

Today's Posts

Forum Help

Follow Us